A wiretapping charge with no credibility

Express-News Editorial Board

Updated
9:08 am CST, Thursday, March 9, 2017

Security outside Trump Tower in New York, two days before the inauguration, Jan. 18, 2017. Without offering any evidence or sourcing, President Donald Trump last week accused his predecessor of tapping the phones at Trump Tower before the election in a series of tweets. less

Security outside Trump Tower in New York, two days before the inauguration, Jan. 18, 2017. Without offering any evidence or sourcing, President Donald Trump last week accused his predecessor of tapping the ... more

Photo: VICTOR J. BLUE /NYT

Photo: VICTOR J. BLUE /NYT

Image
1of/1

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 1

Security outside Trump Tower in New York, two days before the inauguration, Jan. 18, 2017. Without offering any evidence or sourcing, President Donald Trump last week accused his predecessor of tapping the phones at Trump Tower before the election in a series of tweets. less

Security outside Trump Tower in New York, two days before the inauguration, Jan. 18, 2017. Without offering any evidence or sourcing, President Donald Trump last week accused his predecessor of tapping the ... more

Photo: VICTOR J. BLUE /NYT

A wiretapping charge with no credibility

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

A big debate seems to be raging about whether President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated charge that President Obama wiretapped his phones represented strategic Trump or hair-trigger, uncontrollable, tweeter Trump.

And that debate is unworthy of what just occurred. A sitting president, in a tweet storm, just accused his predecessor of breaking the law to plant wiretaps to undermine his candidacy. He did so absent credible evidence, at a time when news cycles were consumed with Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusing himself from any Justice Department investigation into Russian interference in the election. And it occurred with pressure mounting on Congress to investigate ties and contacts between the Russians and the Trump camp.

It was a smear, based on alt-right sources that didn’t even point to what Trump charged. Based ironically on the kind of anonymous sources that Trump thunders about, they reported that authorities had asked a special court to grant a wiretap. But they don’t say Obama ordered the actions.

Two players from pertinent agencies have specifically denied any wiretaping — former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper denying it outright Sunday and FBI Director James Comey reportedly asking the same day that the Justice Department deny it and, in so doing, rejecting Trump’s assertion. And President Obama, through an aide, has also denied this.

So, now Trump has asked for Congress to investigate, though credible evidence of a White House sponsored wiretap does not exist and, therefore, no evidence exists of a crime or political impropriety being committed.

It is a by-now familiar sequence of events. Faced with controversies generally of his own making, first candidate Trump and now President Trump punches back with a spurious charge or action to distract from the controvery. This takes over the news cycle.

It is likely unreasonable at this point to expect the president to resist his pugilistic tendencies. They undermine his presidency and the public’s faith in him and his administration more than anything his critics can accomplish. They do harm to the institution.

But it is reasonable to expect that more thoughtful heads in government not be distracted from the task at hand — investigating Russian meddling in the election. And do it with a special counsel with indictment powers.